Skip to comments.Is 40 Really the New 20? What Sex and The City Doesn't Say (Spoilers)
Posted on 06/03/2008 7:22:19 AM PDT by A_perfect_lady
Is 40 really the New 20? asks Fox News, reviewing the Sex And The City hoopla that seemed to overwhelm everyone this weekend. Pop culture expert and Party Girl author Anna David joins us to weigh in on the phenomenon And the burning question is, what do you make of this revolutionary idea that a woman can be single in her 30s, 40s, even 50s, and its not shameful, its fantastic?
Interesting. Lets explore this revolutionary idea. How did Sex And The City make it okay to be single? After Anna David addresses how threatening this idea is to menit must be, a reactionary Maxim magazine voted Sarah Jessica Parker the most unsexy woman alive (Im sure the hook nose and the wart had nothing to do with it)the Fox news anchor hit upon the kernel of truth in the matter almost unwittingly.
These women seem very fashion forward, they have a lot of money, they seem to be very independent, they live in Manhatten how realistic is this picture?
Anna responds candidly, Well nobody I know who is a free-lance writer like Carrie Bradshaw has that kind of apartment, has those kinds of shoes, has that kind of a wardrobe but you know, its fun
And then, unaware of what theyve just stumbled over, the two women continue on to suggest that, realistic or not, the show will influence culture, women will be reassured that they can be single and its fabulous, and so on and so forth.
A word or two here, folks. Has no one actually registered in their brains what happens in this movie? Heres the ending: Miranda goes back to her husband. Charlotte and her husband have a baby. Carrie and Big finally get married. Only Samantha is single at the end and frankly, its mostly because shes a nymphomaniac and they get fat in relationships because theyre frustrated. Seriously. She dumps him because shes getting fat. Theres a lot of talk about being true to herself and all, but the defining moment is when she realizes shes put on 15 lbs. from eating too much because shes sexually frustrated by monogamy.
So what is the message of this movie, when it ends with three of the four women firmly ensconced in matrimony, and two in motherhood? Its rather like a Jane Austen book: they always end in a wedding. Was Jane Austen revolutionary? I dont think so. But she was a true expert on popular culture, and I thought of her while listening to Anna David admit that these fabulous women had more money than anyone she knew.
There was indeed something about the obsessive reference to designer clothes and names and labels throughout the movie that struck me, also. And make no mistake, every frame of that movie celebrates money and lifestyle. The camera lingers lovingly on bags and boxes with names, names, names on them. None of those women ever wear the same dress or shoes twice, and the happy ending for Carrie and Big comes when she returns to his penthouse for her $550 Manolo-whatevers that have never been worn, and he kneels and slips them onto her feet just like Cinderella, and then proposes while hes down there. This is not revolutionary stuff.
But the money, the money. These women live glamorous lifestyles and make being single alright. Is it then revolutionary to suggest that as long as you have money, being single is cool? Is this a new idea? Back to Jane Austen we go. I reference Emma, the scene where Emma councils her innocent friend Harriet on the importance of choosing a good husband. She herself, she adds, intends never to marry. Harriet is horrified.
But still, you will be an old maidand that is so dreadful!
Never mind, Harriet, I shall not be a poor old maid; and it is poverty only which makes celibacy contemptible to a generous public! A single woman with a very narrow income must be a ridiculous, disagreeable old maid, the proper sport of boys and girls; but a single woman of good fortune is always respectable
Now those who know Emma know that she was a young lady of random opinions, many of which were proven wrong later in her story. But she nevertheless is Jane Austens mouthpiece for voicing popular opinion. I suspect it was a fact then and is a fact now: women with a great deal of money have had sexual license for centuries. They can be single and take lovers, they can be married and unfaithful. As long as you do it with elegance and flair, the world will forgive you.
But even then, by a vote of three to one, the Sex and the City girls agree: single is okay if you are wealthy, but it is better to marry than to burn. Jane Austen meets the Bible. Very revolutionary indeed.
Kristin Davis is hot.
Yup. That’s been discussed throughout the series run. The gals on the show somehow have money to burn AND all the free time to socialize AND never seem to spend much time working out.
AND have all these alpha males slobbering after them at their ages.
I can't believe I have missed every single episode of this life-altering, clearly enlightening, and self empowering show.
Clearly the best America has to offer.
60 is the new 60. Be retired by then.
Why is the author fixated on whether or not it’s “ok” for a woman to be single and at what age it’s appropriate? I have news for the author, as long as a woman is happy with herself, no one cares whether or not she is married. The subplot of the movie or was simply about women’s relationships with their gal-pals. The author reminds me of a FReeper intent on hijacking a thread to suit their own agenda.
Criminy, my wife is a complete Jane Austen fan. I might have to actually go re-read Pride and Prejudice again.
Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.
Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.
No, 40 is still 40. Reality sets in when I look at my hairline and waistline from 19 years ago. I may ache a little when I get out of bed, but I am nowhere near as naive as I was about EVERYTHING back then.
It is a CHICK flick!!!!!!
Now move along...
I only wish I had been taught the harsh realities of life — the good, the bad and the ugly — rather than just the typical “girls get married and have babies” bit.
One good thing I must say about being 42 years old and a wife & mom is the fact that I have so much love in me, and a lot of love to go around. Being over 40 has taught me to be less selfish, self-absorbed & egotistical.
ummm....Emma is not a character in Pride and Prejudice, she’s the main character in Emma (go figure). Either way, Jane Austen is a marvelous read, her character descriptions are phenomenal.
Puts me in mind of the movie "Its a Wonderful Life" when Clarence tells George of the horror that Mary has become "an old maid." We then see Donna Reed in librarian getup being scared of every man she meets.
I certainly hope this show was able to get enough anti-Bush and anti-republican coments mixed in to get nominated for an oscar.
And it’s the women’s relationships that has sent women to the film to celebrate just that.
The show is Sex and the City. It is a bunch of women sluts, not her relationship to her gal pals.
I'm not. What I'm fixated on is this: this movie does not say what people think it says.
Surprisingly, I didn’t notice any bashing. I’m usually on the alert for that, too, but I don’t remember hearing any. They were all too busy gushing over shoes and agonizing over men.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.